Plant Science Bulletin archive
Issue: 1973 v18 No 4 Winter
PLANT SCIENCE BULLETIN
A Publication of the Botanical Society of America, Inc.
December 1973 Vol. 19 No. 4
Teaching and Introductory Courses Charles Heimsch 50
TEACHING AND INTRODUCTORY COURSES1
Attention to various aspects of teaching has been prominent on the national science scene during recent years. Commissions and committees have been organized for a variety of objectives, conferences have been held, and new instructional packages have been developed. These have ranged in focus from those which are concerned with discrete, specific units to complete courses. In some cases these developments have been supported by sizeable grants which have spawned texts, films and even complete television courses. In many colleges and universities entire curricula have been overturned and such institutional involvement has been a manifestation of the broadly based programs of reevaluation and redirection.
In the realm of the biological sciences it was the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS) and related efforts that held prominence among the concerns for teaching objectives. These efforts were directed to the improvement of secondary school biology instruction, and they utilized the talents of many of our fellow botanists. The alternative or experimental green, blue and yellow versions of the courses that resulted, as well as the accompanying laboratory materials and films, are now well known. Whether or not these packages are continuing to be used directly on a large scale, there would seem to be no question that they had a strong impact and carry-over value in biological instruction. Aside from the greater competence of teachers that was encouraged, partly from the availability of special study or refresher courses, there were corollary benefits with respect to subject matter. Emphasis on modern concepts and techniques in the BSCS products was perhaps their major innovation. Although it would be difficult to prove and certainly other factors were involved, it seems reasonable to believe that this program had some influence on the introductory texts for college and university courses that appeared later. Many of these texts are amazingly current with respect to modern problems and research findings. Prior to these events there was a much greater time lag before research findings were incorporated into introductory texts.
The Botanical Society of America has not neglected its responsibilities to teaching. For most of us it is our prime professional obligation and this has had long-standing recognition in the program of the Society. This program has been spearheaded by the activities of the Teaching Section which has regularly sponsored sessions or symposia concerned with our collective interests, and this meeting is no exception. Fellow members who have developed distinctive course offerings at their own institutions have been prominent as leaders in the Society's program. Thus it is not inappropriate to focus on matters that relate to teaching in this address.
In some quarters it seems to have become fashionable to criticize the efforts of college and university teachers. Legislators inquire into various facets of involvement, administrators promote reforms as if teaching has reached
1Address of the retiring President of the Botanical Society of America, presented at the Society's annual banquet, .June 20, 1973 at Amherst, Mass.
an all-time low, and students demand professor evaluation and a voice in administrative actions concerning promotion and tenure. Cries are heard periodically that teachers are unavailable, inept, disinterested in students, or want only to do research. With full recognition that it is dangerous to generalize, I am inclined to believe that such accusations have little credibility among botanists. A combination of factors and circumstances places a special premium on satisfactory teaching and fosters a professional pride to encourage it for most of us. This has been my own experience with colleagues in several institutions. I know that this applies as well to many of you with whom I am well acquainted, and I am confident that it holds true for us generally.
A common feature of those efforts which have been directed to the improvement of courses or the way in which they are taught is that virtually all have been concerned with the beginning course which provides the introductory experience in a subject area. Likewise, it seems that most attention has been given to the interests or objectives of the general student or non-major. Whether there should be separate introductions for non-majors and majors is, of course, a perennial issue. Individual attitudes are conditioned or regulated by institutional and departmental circumstances and a consensus is hardly to be expected. For botany, functioning as a separate department in contrast to a biology department is a major factor. In many cases the viability of a separate department will depend on the course offerings that are available to the non-major.
Certainly not the least important ingredient in teaching considerations is the student who is the consumer of the commodity. What many students expect from their educational experience is highly conditioned by societal developments. There are many signs that suggest we are continuing to experience what some have termed a "humanistic backlash." Asa consequence, the value of scientific or even botanical instruction is lowered in esteem. One often comes to wonder what has happened to the love of learning for its own sake. Pragmatic benefits and relevance are frequently applied in weighing the value of a course. Many hold the conviction that courses emphasizing factual material are ill suited to the objectives of the non-major. For them course experiences which are directed to the impact and relationships of science with society are often viewed as preferable The future leaders in local, state and national functions are, of course, included in the present student population. They will be called upon for decisions and judgments on scientific matters as have been required of other leaders, past and present. Unfortunately there is no easy and simple way of assessing the meaning of a sound scientific experience for them, but it can hardly be reasoned that it would be of no value.
Perhaps time will tell whether these developments on the academic scene are good, had, or indifferent. Their impact in different institutions has likely been variable. In some, they appear to have been largely the concern of a general college with perhaps little or no effects on depart-
mental programs where the emphasis is rather exclusively on advanced instruction and research. In other institutions, though, there has been direct impact on depart-mental programs with pronounced changes.
It is appropriate to consider how botany may fit into these concerns. This is not a new question in any sense. Much of our collective teaching effort is directed toward providing the answer. Further, the question has been subjected to open review repeatedly. I recall that in a symposium sponsored at least in part by the Teaching Section quite a few years ago Professor Harry Fuller talked on "The Role of Botany in a Liberal Education." Some of you may recall that he toyed with the definition of a liberal education in his inimitable manner, but he established the point that an experience in botanical instruction indeed had a place. If we are to consider the non-major student and his objectives, it is basically the matter of a liberal education that we are dealing with. Although this goal may defy clear definition because of its breadth and complexity, I have found a simplified expression of it useful and meaningful. Briefly, a liberal education should encompass the principal elements of man's societal relationships and those of his physical and biological environments. Inasmuch as plants are a primary component of the biological environment, an experience in botanical instruction is justified for the student.
With your indulgence I wish to review the highlights of the changes we have made in the introductory courses in our botany program at Miami University. I do so with the full realization that such criticism might apply as that of a parent who talks excessively about his or her children. The justification in doing this, though, resides in the fact that for many years there has been maintained at Miami a strong departmental program that has produced a relatively large number of graduates who have entered botanical professions. This result has been attributable in many ways to the introductory course experience available to the student. The recent changes have been made in relation to a striking modification of the general curricular requirement in the University. The new curriculum has now been in effect for 2 years, thus a tentative assessment of the effectiveness of our changes can be made.
As a background for appreciating the impact of the change to our present general curriculum, the former requirement which existed for 15 or more years needs to be cited. Known as the Common Curriculum, its essential feature was that every student, regardless of school or college affiliation was required to earn 12 credits in each of the humanities, social sciences and natural sciences. In the natural sciences, 6 credits were required in the physical sciences and 6 credits in the biological sciences. With a recent change from a semester to a quarter calendar the credit values were increased since the courses represented a full year sequence.
Under this scheme, the botany course which served the Common Curriculum eventually exceeded an enrollment of more than 500 as the student body in-creased in size. It is a point of interest that more than half of the places in any one year came to be filled during preregistration held during the Spring, suggesting that the course enjoyed a favorable image on the campus in competition with those in the other biological science departments. Without resorting to detail, the course perhaps can be simply described as one in general botany; successive editions of Wilson and Loomis were used as texts with our own laboratory guide. Concommitant with this course, there was also a companion, more intensive course recommended for prospective majors in botany and other sciences. This course regularly enrolled 100 or more students. At a time when our departmental majors numbered about 75, we determined that about 75% of them had experienced the more intensive introdution and the remainder were drawn from the so-called Common Curriculum course.
Our new general curriculum termed the University Requirement, has induced vast changes, more significant for the sciences than other disciplines. Its basic features reduce the fixed requirement to 9 quarter credits in each of the humanities, social sciences and natural sciences, with an additional 28 credits to be elected in divisions or subjects outside the major. With the adoption of this change, departments were urged to consider single quarter units as against full-year sequences and most have done so. Under this scheme the students may elect to satisfy the science requirement in any one subject or mix up the quarter courses as they may choose.
During our departmental planning for this new curriculum we came to know that many of the single quarter offerings of other departments were to be topical rather than of a survey nature. This along with the trends in our own thinking fashioned the courses now offered. Our deliberations consumed every weekly faculty meeting for a 2-month period. We assumed that the outcome would be vitally important to the entire departmental program, and in no way did we begrudge this expenditure of time and effort.
The basic feature of the result is that there is now available to the student an introductory experience in a variety of botanical areas. A total of seven different courses were involved and each of these presents a solid scientific experience in the area with which it is concerned. Some of these are offered every quarter; some are seasonal and are offered only in the Fall or Spring. Never are all offered at the same time. Others have been offered at least two of the three quarters of the regular year.
These courses are as follows:
Plant Biology which centers on principles as exemplified by structure and function in seed plants.
The Plant Kingdom which demonstrates principles through a survey approach with emphasis on environmental adaptation, reproduction, and evolution.
Plants, Man and Environment which focuses upon an understanding of current environmental problems based upon elementary principles of plant ecology.
Plants and Civilization relates plants to man's social and economic development - history, exploration, foods and other uses, and future demands.
Trees and Shrubs - Identification of native and introduced woody plants.
Spring Flora- Concerns on identification of spring-flowering components of the local flora.
Vegetation of North America which considers various aspects of the major types of North American vegetation.
In addition, we have retained a 2-quarter General Botany course recommended for majors. It is a more intensive version of the Plant Biology course by virtue of a greater total amount of class time.
The total enrollments for each of the entire two years the program has been in effect is as follows.
a-Offered only for one quarter during the year.
During the first year of the new program not quite as many students were enrolled in the collective courses as in the old curriculum. During the year just completed, though, we handled 30% more students in these courses than in the previous year. This is in part the consequence of a different scheduling pattern, but other factors may be involved. Preregistration figures for the coming year suggest that enrollments should at least equal those of the year just completed.
The experience of only two years does not justify identification of trends, but the enrollments in the specific courses reveal what may be regarded as suggestions of trends. These courses which have no laboratory were very successful from the criterion of enrollment. These are Plants, Man and Environment, Plants and Civilization and Vegetation of North America. Plants, Man and Environment enrolled 284 students during two quarters of 1971-72; when offered during three quarters of 1972-73 its total enrollment was 565. Plants and Civilization offered once in 1971-72 enrolled 91, during 1972-73 when it was offered in two quarters the total students were 154. Vegetation of North America had 63 and 155 students, having been offered during one quarter and two quarters in the respective years. In the first year Spring Flora drew 108 students, but in this past year the number was nearly doubled despite the basic laboratory character of the course, conducted in the field when weather permitted. As an aside, it might be pointed out that this number of students has presented certain very real problems in con-serving local vegetation. The Trees and Shrubs course is a Fall offering that parallels Spring Flora. During the first two years it drew about 60 students each time it was offered, but for next Fall nearly all of the 90 places we have provided have been filled.
Whereas those courses just cited showed enrollment increases, the Plant Biology and Plant Kingdom courses which in a sense can be regarded as core courses, showed a decrease in student numbers during the second year. Each of them was offered each quarter and together their total students were 337 and 245 in the respective years. The two-quarter General Botany course presents a contrast, however. Each year it has been near the capacity of 150 students in 6 sections for the first quarter, with some decline during the second quarter. Among these non-majors exceed intended majors. Nearly 66% of the places in this course have already been filled for next year ac-cording to preregistration figures. Perhaps this record for the course is attributable to the fact that it carries 3 credit hours each quarter instead of 4 credits as most of the others.
Initially we were apprehensive concerning the success of the new course alignment at the registration desk, but thus far that issue seems to present no problem. Whereas during the planning stage we had already set aside the supposition that a general survey course was the preferable type of introduction, it was another matter to determine how this would work out in practice. One aspect of the new topical courses that could qualify them as more desirable than a survey introduction is that they would afford an experience in greater depth and would thereby have more lasting value to the student. Likewise, there is a choice that is presented, and this seemingly is much more acceptable than a single, prescribed offering. If the initial experience is satisfying to the student it could lead to subsequent registration with advantage to the department. We have not compiled data on this point.
The new introductory curriculum I have described should probably be considered as an experiment that thus far has yielded only preliminary results. These results are encouraging, however, and they generally support the hypothesis. The courses sustain the departmental program, and the number of undergraduate majors which now totals 125 has not decreased. We have organized it in-dependently to fit our own specific situation and have not determined the extent to which it may exist wholly or in part elsewhere. We recognize, though, that likely it is not completely unique. The situation and circumstances that it has fit may have counterparts elsewhere, and I have chosen to bring it to your attention on this occasion for the merit or value it may hold for others.
For more than a decade academicians have been effective in incremental planning. New ideas resulted in a search for new dollars, new staff, and new space. Programmatic increments were added to what went before. These were years of growth, development and programmatic enrichment on many campuses. How quickly the worn turns!
We are now entering a period of decremental planning. New ideas can be implemented only by finding something we've been doing all along and stopping it. New dollars, new staff and new space are in short supply. Budgets cannot hold steady for long in the face of declining enrollments, declining public enthusiasm for higher education, the fiscal crunch, and inflation. The situation is complicated by the fact that many faculty members seem not to have realized that the worm, indeed, has turned.
The basic problem in decremental planning is to identify priorities in such a way that a spartan vitality can be acquired in essential programs while at the same time building those programs demanded by a more vital future. These programs are not infrequently problem-focused and interdisciplinary. Most of the dollars and staff are now vested in disciplinary programs, many of which are declining. Therein lies part of the problem.
Many of our present programs seem to serve their institutions only peripherally. The main concern in some cases seems to be to serve a discipline or a profession rather than to serve the students of' the institution expected to support the program. Furthermore, where the service is to the institution few seem to be able to articulate clearly just what this service is and why it should
be maintained. Many of our platitudes are wearing thin. If there really is value in continuing a particular program, it will be increasingly necessary for its staff to describe those values in a clear and compelling way.
The description of values in an arena of decremental planning inevitably turns to the setting of priorities. You can start with the position that everything being clone in your department is important, necessary, and critical. If you stay in this position very long you simply don't understand the problem and perhaps need to re-read the second paragraph. It is axiomatic that everything indeed is important, that is, important to someone, somewhere. If it weren't it would have been stopped long ago. The questions, rather, are how important and to whom.
The basic guidelines in decrement al planning are to sort out priorities and to really put in effort where the priorities are. If you consider and classify everything going on in your department and array it in priority order you have made a strong start. If you are ready to abandon the bottom tenth, quarter, third, and half of the list you understand what decremental planning is all about.
The determination of priorities is a difficult job involving many people and several levels of institutional leadership. A few examples may help to reveal just how difficult it can be to say no to "necessary" things.
A while ago I was asked to study the rehab needs of the twenty units in my School. After consultation with Department Chairmen, Program Directors and selected faculty, it became apparent that a minimum list involved fifteen necessary projects. I had examined the situations and satisfied myself that these fifteen were, indeed, necessary. The question of priority among them was so difficult that I arranged them in two priority classes with five projects in the top priority class. In due course central administration called me in with the question, "Which two projects did I really want done'?" Two projects, mind you, when fifteen are "necessary." It is clearer and clearer that there are only so many dollars available. The more we spend on rehab, the less will he available for equipment, library, and so forth. It's priorities all the way.
A second example deals with the way in which campuses handle their salary dollars. In the old days (prior to 1971) salary increases came along pretty easily in most academic institutions, particularly public colleges and universities. Across-the-board raises acre healthfully ahead of cost-of-living increases. Dollars were available to award exceptional merit, right past inequities, provide a boost upon promotion, and accomplish many other institutional odjectives. Negotiations about these matters between Department Chairmen, Deans, faculty groups, and legislators were generally simple and comparatively amiable. After all, everyone wanted the same things — more money for more people to do more things. Incremental planning carried the day. That day is over. While legislators and trustees are fixing smaller percentage increases or lower total dollar limits for salaries, our priorities appear not to be seen or understood. Perhaps we haven't adequately figured out what they are! Decremental planning for fewer dollars for fewer people to do fewer things will change all that. New relations will be established between "necessary" across-the-board needs, affirmative action and other inequities, merit, promotion, and other institutional objectives. Negotiations will become more complex and less charitable. Everyone will no longer want the same thing.
Priorities will he as crucial in decision-making about salary dollars as they will in all other categories of expenditure.
An additional problem in decremental planning is figuring out when to use across-the-board reductions and when to proceed selectively. If priorities have not been sufficiently built into the budgets to be cut, it may be desirable to proceed selectively. Ockham's Razor, suggesting the desirability of the least complex action accomplishing the objectives, may lead to an across-the-board reduction of all accounts. The temptation to use across-the-board reductions should be resisted and used only when you've already built priorities into budgets and only when you can't figure out a better way to accomplish the objectives.
Faculty position reductions are another matter. When student enrollments are dropping off rapidly in foreign languages, it makes little sense to begin non-renewal procedures for professors in biology. Since many departments, like Topsy, just "growed" over the last decade, one might think that faculty reductions should fall across-the-board. This College has taken the position that that would be an error. There are three reasons for this. First, to a large extent system resources must follow student interests. To maintain a twenty-person department no longer attracting students is a waste of resources not tolerable in decremental planning. Second, some programs are growing rapidly and need additional positions. Even if these cannot be supplied as rapidly as needed, it makes no sense to cut growing programs in an across-the-board sweep. Third, in small programs a reduction may place them below a critical mass level. Where this must be done, thought should be given to the relation-ship of the program's priorities and the institution's toward the end of deciding whether to eliminate the program entirely. If the relationship match is a good one, the program should be maintained and the reduction absorbed elsewhere. If the match is poor, it might be better
Changes of Address: Notify the Treasurer of the Botanical Society of America, Inc. Dr. C. Ritchie Bell, Department of Botany, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 26614.
Subscriptions for libraries and persons not members of the Botanical Society of America are obtainable at the rate of $4.00 a year. Send orders with checks payable to "Botanical Society of America, Inc." to the Treasurer.
Manuscripts intended for publication in PLANT SCIENCE BULLETIN should he addressed to Dr. Robert W. Long, editor, Life Science Bldg: 174, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida 33620. Announcements, notes, short scientific articles of general interest to the members of the Botanical Society of America and the botanical community at large will he considered for publication to the extent that the limited space of the publication permits. Line illustrations and good, glossy, black and white photographs to accompany such papers are invited. Authors may order extracted reprints without change in pagination at the time proof is submitted.
Material submitted for publication should be typewritten, doublespaced, and sent in duplicate to the Editor. Copy should follow the style of recent issues of the Bulletin. Microfilms of Plant Science Bulletin are available from University Microfilm, 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106.
The Plant Science Bulletin is published quarterly at the University of South Florida, 4202 Fowler Ave., Tampa, Fla. 33620. Second class postage paid at Tampa, Florida.
to eliminate the program than to permit an across-the-board reduction to reduce it below a critical mass con-figuration.
What does all this have to do with the Plant Sciences? Two things are important. First, plant scientists and plant science departments will be caught up in the transition from incremental to decremental planning. Some will fare better than others. Second, plant scientists can win in a decremental planning arena if they are willing to do the hard mental work it will take to win. To win we must be able to understand and articulate our system of priorities and be willing to cut off more and more of the bottom half of the list to preserve the vitality of the top half. To win, we must be able to understand our institution's priorities and the priorities of the greater society they reflect and find ways to say yes to these priorities.
When hard arguments over conflicting priorities are needed, aloofness can be very damaging. Lack of understanding of the degree of match between our priorities and our institution's priorities can be deadly. In the days of incremental planning it may have been true that the loudest squeaking wheel got the grease. In decremental planning the tightest priorities with the best match to institutional and societal priorities will get more than their share. They'll get part of someone else's share.
I am writing this mote in the hope that more plant scientists will draw back momentarily, examine their priorities and their institution's priorities and prepare to adjust their activities accordingly. Plant Science can be so important to so many people in so many ways that if its support structure breaks down we'll have ourselves to blame. That shouldn't be allowed to happen. Decremental planning can work for us rather than against us if we are alert to what's going on. Few of us are really happy about the turn of events that, forces decremental planning upon us. We must, nonetheless, become skilled at this new challenge. Let's get with it!
Elwood B. Ehrle
The Annual Meeting:
Dating from at least the time of the formation of the Royal Society of London, it has been traditional that members of scientific societies gather yearly to present the results of their researches, to gain new insights into scientific concepts and to make contacts necessary for research and teaching. So deeply is this tradition rooted, that only an heretic would question it, but since I have been called just about everything else, I will raise the question of the utility of annual meetings of the Botanical Society of America.
Although not quite an elder scientist, I can remember the hey-day of funding when adequate-and sometimes more than adequate-money was available to support travel, housing, food and, if properly concealed, the price of a beer. Since attendance was frequently conditioned on presenting a paper, contributed paper sessions were extensive and the convenor of' a symposium had no trouble in getting participants. Irrespective of the quality of the presentations, attending scientists frequently had to make difficult choices as to which session to go to. With reduction in funding, recent meetings have necessarily been thin and are bulked out with symposia that may fill up time without necessarily filling one's intellectual belly. There is every reason to suspect that this financial pinch will in-crease in the forseeable future. Indeed, we already see many institutions imposing a one-paid-meeting-per-year rule.
Initially, frequent meetings served the need for rapid communication. Journals were few in number and even in the first half of the present century there were delays of over a year between acceptance and publication of a manuscript. More rapid communication now exists: pre-prints and even notices not much more detailed than laboratory notes are inexpensive thanks to Xerox, et al. and many areas of special interest have newsletters. In the past, there were relatively few scientific societies, a situation that no longer is true. The resulting fragmentation, whatever other advantages or disadvantages it might have, permits precisely that interchange that we all agree is an invaluable part of scientific activity. In short, we can see and hear each other several times a year.
And how the number of meetings have proliferated! International congresses vie for time and compete for exotic locales. The listings of meetings in Science are more formidable each month. And when you read the abstracts, you frequently find the same paper at two or three meetings. This may facilitate promotion, and this I begrudge no one, but redundancy doesn't advance Botany one whit. The annual meeting promotes duplication and we haven't the time, the energy or the money to perpetuate unproductive activities. Those of you who have had to come up with a fresh idea each year for a symposium can understand my thesis and so can those of you who have to listen to the same old stuff.
This past ,June, I proposed to the Council of the Botanical Society that we consider holding society meetings on alternate years. The motion was defeated with only one Yea vote (my own). "But how will we con-duct the business of the Society'?" Well, there are relatively few members of the Council and not all attend each meeting. The Council could meet on the off year, make its recommendations and submit them to mail ballot. possibly via the Plant Science Bulletin. After all, attendance at the business meeting is pitifully small and a mail ballot would probably elicit more member response.
Think on it. The declining attendance at annual meetings may do more damage to our Society and our profession than anything else that we might do.
Richard M. Klein
Department of Botany
Uniuersity of Vermont
Burlington, Vt. 05401
International Symposium on the
Because of the increasing amount of research on and utilization of mangroves throughout the tropics, a symposium has been organized to bring together the interested people. The symposium is designed to report on basic aspects of mangrove biology and utilization of mangrove areas by man, and to provide a forum in which
conflicts in use of mangroves can be considered.
The Symposium will be held at the East - West Center in Honolulu, Hawaii on October 8 - 11, 1974. Program outline:
I. Biology: A. General Aspects
II. Management: A. Forestry
III. Conflicts: A. Natural vs. Social Values B. Methods for Resolution of Conflicts
All papers presented at the Symposium will be published in the proceedings. In addition, manuscripts of substantial content are solicited from authors unable to attend the Symposium. At least partial travel support may be available to participants. Twenty minutes is scheduled for presented papers.
Abstracts (200 - 400 words) of papers for publication should be sent to:
Dr. Gerald E. Walsh
by April 1, 1974. It is anticipated that the final program will be arranged and selection of manuscripts to be published will be completed by May 1, 1974. The Organizing Committee cannot guarantee acceptance of every manuscript submitted for publication. All accepted manuscripts most be received by September 1, 1974.
If you wish to attend the Symposium, present a paper, or publish a manuscript, please contact Dr. Walsh as soon as possible.
The First International Congress of Systematic and Evolutionary Biology
A common saying in biology is that as science advances, it becomes more and more difficult, to keep abreast of developments even within ones own specialty. It was with this difficulty in mind that the First International Congress of Systematic and Evolutionary Biology was organized. It was hoped that this congress would bring together for the first time workers from diverse fields who shared an interest in problems of systematics and evolution, and provide an enjoyable and concentrated summary of current research. The week long meeting from August 4 to 12, 197:3 in Boulder, Colorado, seems to have succeeded admirably in achieving this goal as well as providing an opportunity for personal interactions. The need for this type of meeting was evidenced by the overwhelming attendance at symposia such as those on continental drift and co-evolution which spanned several fields.
The week was organized with concurrent sessions of symposia and contributed papers on Monday and Tuesday and again from Thursday through Saturday. Wednesday was a free day during which almost everyone took full ad-vantage of the fine weather and Boulder's proximity to a variety of Rocky Mountain habitats and classical paleobotanical sites.
The major symposia consisted of a series of morning sessions devoted to various aspects of the grassland, alpine, marine, desert and tropical biomes. The other symposia, held during the afternoons, covered a wide range of topics from the origin of the angiosperms to the intricacies of modern interactions between plants and animals. In addition, of special interest to botanists, were also the symposia on philosophies of systematics, the roles of numerical taxonomy and computers in systematics, the evolutionary biology of populations, the evolutionary significance of proteins, the ultrastructure, chemistry and genetics of fungi, and the origin of the eukaryotic cell.
The contributed papers were grouped by topic and several of the sessions provided a good balance between the current work by botanists and zoologists on similar problems. Scattered throughout the week, there were numerous additional meetings of special interest groups organized in advance by various participants. The popularity of these informal get-togethers further emphasized the need for exchange between botanists and zoologists.
The papers presented in most of the major symposia will be published in diverse journals. The places of publications of these papers, as well as a summary of the meetings and a list of participants, will be sent this fall to all the registered members. The preliminary tally of members is about 1500 official registrants representing almost 40 countries. Unlike most congresses, the ICSEB was not funded by any government aid but rather by grants and loans from smaller organizations such as IAPT, SSZ, IUBS, and the ASZ. Treasurer Dr. Gilbert Daniels reports that the congress will meet all its costs through a combination of direct payment and the contribution of the various participating organizations.
In general, the local committee is to be commended for their organization, hospitality, and the splendid all-congress banquet. In many instances the lecture rooms were too small for the sessions held in them, but perhaps the distribution of attendees can serve as a guide to the committee of the next. congress. Although the specific location of the second ICSEB is still in doubt, it is planned to be held in central Europe in 1978-79.
THE DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY, NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY, Raleigh, N.C. 27607, is seeking an Experimental Taxonomist - Biosystematist, Rank: Assistant Professor of Botany, Permanent 12-month appointment beginning July 1 or September 1, 1974. Resume should include a brief statement regarding area of special interest for research and teaching, training in biosystematic techniques, and plant groups of particular interest and competence. Send resume, transcripts, and three letters of recommendation to: Dr. James W. Hardin, Chin., Search Committee - Biosystemal.ics, Department of Botany, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27607. Applications will be accepted until March 15, 1974.
POMONA COLLEGE will have an opening for an experienced Ph.D. in the Botany Department beginning in the academic year 1974-75 to replace Dr. Lyman Benson who is retiring. Rank and salary will depend upon qualifications. The special field is plant taxonomy.
Interested persons should write to: Dr. Edwin A. Phillips, Botany Department Chairman, Pomona College, Claremont, California.
THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN Department of Botany announces an open competition for two Newcombe Fellowships to be awarded for the 1974-75 academic year. These fellowships, restricted to students who plan to pursue graduate study in plant physiology, physiological ecology, or cell biology, will provide a stipend of $2600 for the academic year plus tuition.
Interested persons should apply by February 1, 1974, to Dr. Charles B. Beck, Chairman, Department of Botany, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104.
WHO IS A BOTANIST?
The American Horticultural Society will soon establish a nationwide program of horticultural certification awarding special diplomas to all who can meet carefully-fixed standards that demonstrate the art and skill of horticulture. The program came about at the urging of the society's President David G. Leach. Mr. Leach appointed a committee to look into establishing such a program and to determine what tangible value such a certification program would have in the horticultural job market. It is believed certification could make the field of horticulture more attractive, relevant, and rewarding and was not conceived to compete with the training in schools and colleges. A committee was established that has been exploring the methods for screening and examining candidates for establishing equitable standards that would serve all parts of the country.
Another of our sister societies, The Ecological Society of America, has been concerned with a similar program. Their President Dr. Robert Platt informed me that the society is interested in establishing a register of professional ecologists. The implication would be that those persons who are able to attain listing in the register could properly call themselves ecologists.
When a botanist hears this kind of news, a number of questions come to mind. For instance, will the ecologist also be a plant ecologist? Will he perform duties or carry out assignments that many botanists are better trained to do? And the professional horticulturalist — will he also function as a professional botanist? Will he be more likely to receive favorable treatment from governmental, industrial, or institutional agencies because he has been certified while botanists go uncertified? Should the Botanical Society of America also be studying the desirability or feasibility of some kind of professional, official register of botanists?
The question of "who is a botanist" can lead to some bizarre situations. A colleague of mine here in Florida tells how a specialist in reptile taxonomy was approached in regard to the problem of the taxonomy of Cannabis sativa (marijuana). When the zoologist demurred the lawyer was surprised to learn that he had the wrong kind of biologist!
Perhaps there is a need for a better way of defining and describing ourselves to the outside world. At least two societies are going the route of certification and "official register". Perhaps botanists should be thinking about this problem too.
ALL BOTANISTS SHOULD START PLANNING now to attend the 1974 AIRS Meeting, June 16-21, at Arizona State University, Tempe. Located in the heart of the Southwest, this is a region of exceptional interest for students of plant and animal adaptation, of biogeography, and of systematics and evolutionary processes. Three major biomes, grassland, desert and montane coniferous forest, predominate in the huge area from western Texas to southern California and from the central Mexican plateau North to southern Nevada, Utah and Colorado, and locally there are numerous other minor edaphically and physiographically determined ecosystems.
The ALBS symposium at the Tempe meetings, under the theme, "The Varied Environments of the Southwest" will examine some of these aspects of this diverse and biogeographically fascinating region, where, within a few miles, one may go from the desert floor, where every organism is adapted to conserve and maximally utilize every drop of available water to deep coniferous forest with cold mountain streams.
THE CHARTER FLIGHTS COMMITTEE has mailed nearly 15,000 initial notices to members of plant science societies. As of October 1, 1973, approximately 1800 replies were received. On this basis, the committee will conclude negotiations with an airline. The contract will be based on the number of reservations accompanied by a deposit. Once a contract is signed, it may not be possible to obtain additional planes and more seats. Members who have indicated interest in charter flights are, therefore, urged strongly to make their reservations.
THE SEVENTH JESSE M. GREENMAN AWARD will be presented at the 1974 annual banquet of the Botanical Society of America at Tempe, Arizona. This Award of $200 is presented each year by the Alumni Association of the Missouri Botanical Garden in recognition of the best paper in plant systematics based on a doctoral dissertation published during the previous year. Papers published during 1973 are now being considered. Reprints of such papers should be sent to Alwyn H. Gentry, Secretary, Alumni Association, Missouri Botanical Gar-den, 2315 Tower Grove Avenue, St. Louis, Missouri 63110, before May 1, 1974.
William R. Anderson, New York Botanical Garden, is the recipient of the 1973 Award. The winning publication is his "A Monograph of the Genus Crusea (Rubiaceae)." Mein. N.Y. Bot. Gard. 22 (4): 1-128. 1972.
AN EXHIBI'T'ION ENTITLED "PI.ANT ILLUSTRATIONS FROM THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION" is open in the Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation at Carnegie-Mellon University. The exhibition includes paintings and drawings by Frederick A. Walpole, a noted turn-of-the-century botanical illustrator, and photographs by Dr. Edward S. Ayensu, chairman of the Smithsonian's
department of botany. Walpole, in his own lifetime, was considered to be the finest botanical illustrator anywhere. Through use of an ink wash and a brush with only a few sable hairs, Walpole created delicate drawings resembling etchings. As an artist for the U.S. Department of Agriculture's department of botany, Walpole traveled to many areas, but his most noted artistic-scientific explorations were in Alaska, where he was fascinated by the region's wildflowers and forests. The Walpole works are complimented in the Hunt show by the nature photographs of Dr. Ayensu, who holds degrees from Miami University, George Washington, and the University of London and specializes in the study of plant anatomy.
The two-man show may be viewed b_y the public at Hunt Institute in the penthouse of Hunt Library Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., through February 28, when it will move to Washington, D.C. for its first viewing at the Smithsonian.
A MILESTONE IS BEING CELEBRA'T'ED by the Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. As the oldest botanical periodical "of this hemisphere," as the title page announces, the Bulletin. is now publishing volume 100, the first having been issued in 1870. To mark this occasion, the Club sponsored the Torrey Symposium on Current Aspects of Fungal Development at the annual meeting of the American Institute of Biological Sciences in Amherst, Massachusetts in June. Another symposium, on The Use of Electrophoresis in the Taxonomy of Algae and Fungi, was co-sponsored by the Club, the Mycological Society of America, the Phycological Society of America, and the Phytochemical, Phycological, and Systematic Sections of the Botanical Society of America. Both these symposia will be published in volume 100 of the Bulletin.
THE "MARINE FLORA AND FAUNA OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES," a series of original, illustrated manuals on the identification, classification, and general biology of the coastal marine plants and animals of the northeastern United States, is being published by the National Marine Fisheries Service, Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, as "NOAA Technical Report NMFS CIRCULARS".
Manuals are being prepared in collaboration with systematists from the United States and abroad. To date seventy-five specialists are working on various groups. The first manual to appear in print is "Annelida: Oligochaeta" by Drs. D. G. Cook and R. O. Brinkhur:st. Publication of "Protozoa: Ciliophora" by Dr. A. C. Borror, and "Higher Plants of the Marine Fringe of Southern New England" by Dr. E. T. Maul is expected in July 1974. Three additional manuals are in press, and two more are being revised. Manuals are available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Price of the first manual is thirty-five cents.
RECENTLY SEVERAL UNIVERSITY LIBRARIANS have told us they are looking critically at their journal holdings. Continued budget cuts have caused them to make surveys of their journal subscriptions with the thought of eliminating those that are not important to the present staff. In order to avoid having libraries drop their subscriptions to our journal, we would urge that you talk to your librarian about the importance of the A.J.B.
This should help to preserve library subscriptions, and indeed may increase them.
At the University of Wyoming Department of Botany Dr. Daniel J. Crawford, who joined the faculty in 1969, was promoted to Associate Professor effective July 1, 1973. Dr. Thomas S. Moore, Ph.D. Indiana University and for the past three years a postdoctoral fellow in Dr. Beever's lab, University of California at Santa Cruz, has joined the faculty as Assistant Professor. Dr. H. T. Northen retired and became Professor Emeritus on June 30 after 37 years of service.
Dr. Walter H. Hodge has left the National Science Foundation to accept an appointment as Senior Research Associate at the L. H. Bailey Hortorium of Cornell University. Dr. Hodge was associated with NSF since 1961, first as Special Consultant for Tropical Biology, later as Program Director for Systematic Biology, and more recently as Head of the Section of Ecology and Systematic Botany. From 1966-1970 he also served NSF in Tokyo, Japan as Head of the Science Liaison Staff for the Foundation's Far Eastern office. At the Bailey Hortorium, Dr. Hodge will manage the final preparation of manuscript for Hortus III, the new edition of this standard work, to be published in 1975.
Dr. Louis C. Chadwick, Professor Emeritus, Division of Floriculture and Ornamental Horticulture at the Ohio State University, was named winner of the LIBERTY HYDE BAILEY MEDAL.
The Award is the highest honor that is given in the field of American Horticulture.
Several young botanists who have recently accepted positions include: Warren Abrahamson, Dept. of Biology, Bucknell University; Rose Broom, Dept. of Botany, University of Maryland; Thomas Lockwood, Dept. of Botany, Indiana University; James Rodman, Dept. of Biology, Yale University; Lawrence Shag, Assoc. Curator, Dept. of Botany, Smithsonian Institution; Norris Williams, Dept. of Biological Sciences, Florida State University.
Notice to Professors: When you have a student who accepts a position, drop a line to Dr. Beryl Simpson, Department of Botany, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560, for inclusion in the the Personalia column. This courtesy is helpful to them and to their colleagues in the botanical community.
Adriance Sherwood Foster
With the death of Adriance Foster on May 1st, 1973, from complications arising from an acute case of spinal osteomyelitis, plant morphology lost one of its most dedicated practitioners and influential teachers. I think that it can be said without exaggeration that Adriance Foster was one of the most significant figures in structural botany of his generation. Not only did his numerous doctoral students go on to take posts at the most important institutions here and abroad, but they continued to be productive in those positions and many have had an
equivalent influence on students of their own. The degree of independence that Adriance inspired in his disciples can be measured both by their individual versatility and their broad range of interests. Although most began with a specialization in the fields of anatomy and morphology, many later radiated into a diversity of allied disciplines, including morphogenesis, physiology, cell biology, systematic anatomy, taxonomy and even biosystematics and evolutionary biology. As the first plant anatomist in the Botany department of the University of California at Berkeley, Adriance Foster singlehandedly established such a strong tradition in structural botany that to this day it is difficult for many to believe that he had had no predecessors in his position.
The inspiration that Adriance provided students at all educational levels stemmed from his own, unimpeachable example. His keen, ever-questioning mind, his desire for the highest levels of observation and workmanship, combined with his remarkable ability to cotnmunicate his findings with a unique clarity and sense of style, established standards for morphological research that will never be lost. Moreover, his tremendous personal love for his science and for plants in general, coupled with his rare ability to communicate this enthusiasm to others, provided an educational stimulus of immeasurable influence.
For me, Adriance Foster represents one of the true pioneers in botanical science, a fiercely independent. investigator and trail blazer who was drawn to a particular research problem because of his own insatiable curiosity rather than its potentially fashionable nature. In each of his major areas of research (leaf differentiation; growth and development of the shoot apex; idioblastic cell structure and differentiation; and leaf venation) he began his studies because of his deep interest and because they were a natural outgrowth of a preceding line of investigation. Each time he began a new area of inquiry there was virtually no one in the country who was working on the problem, nor who had much interest in it. On more than one occasion he confided to me that when he began a relatively untouched topic he felt rather lonely because of the lack of interested colleagues to communicate with. It was only after he had published his beautifully detailed, admirably documented papers that the interest of others was stimulated.
His studies of the structure of shoot apical meristems furnish a particularly good example of the independence and originality of his contributions and their impact on the work of subsequent researchers. Prior to the time of Adriance's studies, investigations of meristem architecture had been restricted largely to the determination of the geometry of cell division and to the portrayal of meristem cell lineages. The underlying assumption was that all cells of a meristem were identical in their basic cytology. While studying bud scale development in Ginkgo biloba, Adriance discovered that cells of the shoot. apex of Ginkgo exhibit a greater cytological heterogeneity than had hitherto been appreciated. Hence while certain zones of the shoot apex consist of typical, densely cytoplasmic, eunteristematic cells, other regions exhibit considerable cell vacuolation and variations in wall thickness, even close to the summit of the apical dome. Because of this cellular heterogeneity and the lack of a clearly defined pattern of cell lineages, Adriance turned to a study of the cytological features and relative frequencies of cell division in order to characterize the structure and growth of such gymnospermous apices. It was precisely this more biological approach to the study of meristem architecture that provided the basic change in orientation which set the stage for today's more rigorous cell kinetic and biochemical studies of meristem behavior.
Adriance's pioneering nature was also expressed in the influential textbooks which he wrote in the fields of anatomy and morphology. Each in its own way was a departure from the way that the subject had been treated previously. For example, although his compact, unillustrated Practical Plant Anatomy began in its first edition as a simple laboratory manual, the textual introductions in the later editions presented plant histology in a much more dynamic, developmental vein and therefore represented a philosophical innovation. In fact his changes in organization of the subject of plant anatomy were to be so important that they have been emulated by many texts in use today. Furthermore, his emphasis on the use of living material wherever possible in the anatomy laboratory proved to he a welcome relief from the rather archaic and exclusive use of prepared microscope slides. The concept of having students prepare their own sections from living plant organs not only helped them to appreciate more readily the relationship of internal structure to external morphology but it also stimulated the students' interest in plant histology as a truly "vital" science.
His Comparative Morphology of Vascular Plants, written with one of his former students, Ernest Gifford, was also a unique contribution to the teaching of plant morphology. By virtue of its hovel introductory chapters the student became aware of morphology as a truly comparative discipline and for the first time was adequately introduced to the philosophy and methodology of morphological research before attempting to apply these principles to the evaluation of specific plant groups. The book was also unusual because of its broader representation of morphological evidence and its inclusion of fossil data in the solution of structural and evolutionary problems. Fortunately, Adriance was able to complete the anxiously awaited second edition of this work just before his death. I believe that this book will stand as his personal testament and the embodiment of all that he stood for in the field of plant morphology.
As with anyone who had strong opinions and represented an individualistic point of view, Adriance Foster had his occasional critics as well as his supporters. It was especially in the 1960's, when he was in the autumnal phase of his career, that some criticized him for not utilizing the newer techniques of electron microscopy and plant tissue culture since these seemed to he such natural extensions of the type of work that he had done. Undoubtedly, had he been younger, Adriance might well have adopted these newer procedures. However, the truth was that he was near the end of his career when these techniques carne upon the scene and he simply did not wish to make such a marked shift in approach at that time. This, together with the fact that he always wanted to do his own work and remain a practitioner, meant he had to he limited to those skills with which he was most familiar and confident, evert though he knew that they restricted what he ultimately could accomplish.
However, despite these limitations, I think that Adriance's rigorous sense of scholarship and broad perspective enabled him to transcend the level of mere technicianship and to phrase his research in terms of more
significant biological problems. In so doing, he helped to elevate the goals of structural botany, thereby encouraging the plant. anatomist to place his fine technical resources at the service of biological questions instead of the reverse as so often had been the tendency in the past.
In the final analysis, while Adriance Foster himself did not pursue the ultimate solutions to all of the questions he raised, he nevertheless provided the impetus and pointed the way for others who would follow. And even though all who knew him are deeply saddened that we no longer have the advantages of his stimulation and counsel, I think that his presence will continue to he felt through that very special quality of human life, "the immortality of continuing influence."
Donald R. Kaplan
Frank D. Kern
Dr. Frank D. Kern, the first dean of the Graduate School at The Pennsylvania State University, died at the age of 90.
Trustees of the University in 1971 named the new Kern Graduate Building for him recognizing his 37 years of service, which included also appointments as professor and head of the Department of Botany prior to his retirement with emeritus rank in 1950.
Dr. Kern became professor and head of the Department of Botany at Penn State in 1913, after serving as special agent for the Bureau of Plant Industry of the U. S. Department of Agriculture, as botanist at the Agricultural Experiment Station and instructor at Purdue University, and as research scholar at the New York Botanical Gar-den.
Dr. Kern received the bachelor of arts degree from the University of Iowa, the master of science degree from Purdue, and the doctor of philosophy degree from Columbia University.
In 1922, when the Graduate School at Penn State was formally established, Dr. Kern was named dean. During the next 28 years he directed the development of graduate programs in numerous fields.
A noted botanist, Dr. Kern twice served one-year terms, in 1926-27 and 1933-34, as acting dean of the University of Puerto Rico's Colleges of Agriculture and Engineering while on leave of absence from Penn State. The University of Puerto Rico conferred upon him the honorary degree of doctor of science in 1926.
Since his retirement, he has published more than 20 papers, and earlier this year he published a new book to revise and update research he started 60 years ago on a genus of fungi known as cedar apple rusts. His botanical research throughout his career was concerned most notably with rusts and other fungus diseases in plants and resulted in numerous articles and research papers.
Although an active researcher, Dr. Kern taught over the years 51 courses at Penn State, primarily in elementary botany and plant pathology.
He was a charter member of the American Phvtopathological Society and a past vice president of that organization; a past president of the Mycological Society of America; a past president of the Pennsylvania Academy of Sciences; and a past vice president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Dean Kern was honored in 1958 by the American Phytopathological Society on its 50th anniversary as a charter member and as author of the first scientific paper published by the Society.
He also held membership in the Botanical Society of America and the Indiana Academy of Science. From 1947 to 1951 he served as national president of Phi Kappa Phi, general scholastic honor society, and he continued after his retirement as an active participant in that honorary's activities.
He was a member of Sigma Xi, science honorary; Gamma Sigma Delta, agriculture honorary; Phi Epsilon Phi, botany honorary; and Alpha Zeta, professional agricultural fraternity; and also of St. Andrew's Episcopal Church, State College.
Harry J. Fuller*
I)r. Fuller had been a professor of botany at the University of Illinois from 1932 until he became ill in 1958.
He was born Oct. 8, 1907, in St. Louis, the son of Henry Lyman and Lydia Nunsberg Fuller. He received a bachelor's degree in 1929, a master's degree in 19:30 and a doctorate degree in 1933 from Washington University in St. Louis.
Dr. Fuller served as a rubber specialist for the U.S. government from 1942 to 1945 in Venezuela and British Guiana. He was elected vice president of the American
'An appropriate statement regarding Dr. Fuller's contribution to American Botany is in preparation.-ed.
Association for the Advancement of Science in 1957, and was the first editor of "Plant Science Bulletin".
He was the author of "The Plant World" and "College Botany."
He was married to Mary Eleanor Ledgerwood on Oct. 1, 1931, in Greenville. She died in 1967.
Dr. Fuller leaves a daughter, Pamela Rawles of Libertyville, and three grandchildren.
VALENTINE, D. H., (ed.). Taxonomy, Phytogeography, and Evolution. Academic Press, London and New York, 1972. 431 pp.
A feeling that the geographical aspects of taxonomy and evolution have been somewhat neglected in recent symposia was responsible for a conference sponsored by the Linnaean Society of London, the Botanical Society of the British Isles and the International Organization of Plant Biosystematics. The meeting was held at the University of Manchester in 1971 and this volume is a result. The editor asks the reader to judge whether the conference was timely and the contributions were well chosen and arranged. This reviewer feels that for the most part the answer is yes. The symposium was timely, for it is apparent that biosystematics has given a new dimension to plant geography and we find that many of the participants make use of biosystematic data. The contributors came from twelve different countries with the greatest number of them, quite understandably, coming from the host country. Six speakers came from the United States (H. G. Baker, G. W. Gillett, H. Lewis, P. H. Raven, O. Solbrig, and G. L. Stebbins). The introductory section comprises remarks by the editor and a paper, the longest in the book, by Stebbins, entitled, "Ecological distribution of centers of major adaptive radiation in angiosperms." Stebbins advances the principle of "genetic uniformitarianism" ("The processes of evolution have operated in the past essentially as they do now, but on different phenotypes.") and argues for a semi-xeric origin of angiosperm radiation. The second section of the book deals with major geographical disjunctions in relation to evolution and migration. Endemism is the concern of the third section. The fourth part considers geographical evolution in selected genera and families. The fifth section treats miscellaneous topics, which among other things includes a discussion of the migration of weeds (Baker) and computational methods in the study of plant distribution (N. Jardine). The book concludes with a short paper by A. R. Clapham, entitled "Questions answered and unanswered." Since it was impracticable to include the discussions following the individual contributions, the final paper deals with some of the questions that arose (luring the symposium. The book, unlike some other recent symposia volumes, is well indexed which obviously in-creases its usefulness.
Charles B. Heiser, Jr. Indiana University
MILLER, ORSON K., .JR. Mushrooms of North America. E. P. Dutton and Co., Inc., New York, 1972. 360 pp. $17.95.
Mushrooms have long been of interest and a curiosity to man. Their value as food, medicine, sources of dyes and other materials dates back for centuries. Toxic and hallucinogenic properties of mushrooms have a similar lengthy history. In the past few decades the discoveries of ethnobotanists concerning mushroom use, the increasing reports of plant pathologists and mycologists as to their role as parasites or mycorrhizae with other plants, and the "nature food" fad by the current environmentally conscious generation have generated a tremendous interest in fleshy fungi. Mushroom literature, especially field guides to poisonous and edible species, is in great demand. Orson Miller's Mushrooms of North America was designed to satisfy the needs of all types of users: the casual observer, the ardent amateur mycologist, and the student of biology.
Several features of this book will he appealing to many. For the amateur the simplified picture key to major groups of fungi at. the beginning will quickly orientate him as to the group he is dealing with. It would have been convenient to have the page numbers on which these groups appear in the text, thus eliminating a trip to the index. A full key to the major groups of fungi is combined with 72 keys to the families, genera, and species. Unfamiliar terms are explained in the Glossary and in many cases illustrated in an accompanying Illustrated Glossary. At least 280 species are illustrated in color; by far some of the best color reproduction that I have seen in a textbook. Most of these show the fungus in its natural habitat, ex-posing useful diagnostic features. Each description in the text is numbered consecutively; the same number appears next to the species in the key, and if there is a color illustration, that number appears next to the plate.
In his introduction, the author discusses the role of fungi in nature, collecting and studying mushrooms, names, microscopic characters, seasonal fruiting, edibility and preparation, and mushroom toxins. Throughout the book efforts are made to educate the amateur and the student. Mycological terminology used consistently is parenthetically explained. Microscopic features are employed to a much larger extent than in most field guides. Pains are taken, however, to explain that these features are necessary in order to distinguish confused data. Considerably more information is provided for mushroom toxins than is included in most field guides currently available.
Keys and descriptions are provided for 1:3 major groups of fleshy fungi. These are treated under 4 chapters: Basidiomycetes (actually, only the Hymenomycetes), Gasteromycetes, Heterobasidiomycetes, and Ascornycet.es. The keys should be relatively easy to follow since the user is repeatedly referred to the Glossary for illustrations or descriptions of features in question. Detailed descriptions of 422 species are provided which usually include size, shape, texture and color of cap, stalk, ring, veil and spores. Information about growth habit, chemical reactions, edibility, hallucinogenic properties, frequency, distribution, special relationships, seasonal occurrence, alternate names, related species, taster's experiences, and cooking notes is also provided.
The 20th century has brought tremendous changes in the classification of mushrooms. For those who had their taste of mycology a few years back, the recognition of 14 families of gilled mushrooms may come as a shock. The frequent use of microscopic and microchemical features will often be disconcerting for those without a microscope. Ample field characters and other data are usually provided to enable an individual to determine if in fact he has a species in question. For a general field guide, many
more species of important genera are included than is usually found in similar books. To mention a few, Miller has included 15 species of Amanita; 19 of Hygrophorus; 23 of Lacterius; 11 of Russula; 6 each of Lepiota, Agaricus and Coprinus; 17 of Boletus; and 11 of Suillus. Full descriptions of 422 species are included; while more than 680 species are mentioned.
The Dai Nippon Printing Co., Ltd. Tokyo has done a superb job in printing the color illustrations. They are some of the best that I have seen in print. Unfortunately, through an oversight of the author, publisher, or printer, a number of the photographs are out of position, even though the plate numbers are correct for all but 10 illustrations. However, the printer has provided corrections for these captions in the form of self-adhesive labels with instructions as to which captions they are to be placed over. Another oversight that even the amateur will likely catch is the cover illustration for the Gasteromycetes on page 189 which is that of Morchella! Otherwise, printing errors are at a minimum. Those which I noticed are as follows: p. 154, third line from bottom in they key should be 11, not 10; p. 49, under species 48, Russula is misspelled; p. 57, line 1, gree should be green; and p. 171, under 10-b of the key, western should be eastern because Boletus frostii and B. luridus do occur in the eastern U.S. Although keys and illustrations are given for four species of Morchella, descriptions of individual species were omitted on pages 214 and 215. Descriptions of 413, Underwoodia; 414, Wynnea; 420, Rhizinia; and 421, Sarcosoma are all of operculate Discomycetes and should have been included with Peziza and related species (p. 218) rather than with Earth Tongues and other Ascomycetes where inoperculates and pyrenomycetes are discussed. Clathrus in the index should be 191 not 154.
A bibliography of approximately 50 references will be helpful for those who want to dig deeper into the literature of particular groups. If you have never had crab stuffed mushrooms, Hericium marinade, Chat erelle biscuits, Marasmius cookies, or a mycological martini, you will certainly want to refer to the list of 30 recipes for cooking, pickling, freezing, canning, and preserving mushrooms.
For those who buy the book after December 31, 1972, the price is $17.95, which includes a 21 cm. plastic ruler! Printing is on a heavy, semigloss, high quality paper, easy to read, with headings in bold print, and a standard for-mat throughout. It has a durable, cloth-bound cover in burnt-orange. The 7 x 10 x 1-114 inch book should fit comfortably on most anyone's bookshelf. It's "shelf life" should be long, even with frequent use.
The author, printer, and publisher are to be congratulated for producing a beautiful book on mushrooms. It will be a valuable book for amateur mushroom hunters, field botanists, and beginning mycologists. It should be an excellent book for courses in field botany or mycology. Mycologists who are not specialists in agarics and related fungi will find this a valuable reference hook. I feel it is currently the most satisfactory field guide to the identification and edibility of North American fungi.
James W. Kim hrough University of Florida
VOSS, EDWARD G. Michigan Flora, Part I. Gymnosperms and Monocots. Cranbrook Inst. of Sci. Bull. 55, Bloomfield Hills, Mich. 1972. xv + 488 pp. $7.50.
"This Flora is intended to help any interested person, whether a visitor in one of our state parks or a botanist studying problems of plant geography, in an understanding of the plants around him: what is known about their kinds, their identification and their distribution:—" and the author has succeeded well in fulfilling his stated intention during the years this volume has been in preparation. The introductory section includes discussions of data sources, of Michigan post-glacial history, the use of keys, basic nomenclature, morphological variation within populations, as well as in-formation on habitats and distribution patterns. These thirty-eight pages of introductory material serve well for those who need them in explaining some of the traditional and often obscure reasons as to why floristic practices are as they are. The quantity of material discussed may seem excessive but the material will be in proportion at completion of the projected three volume flora, of which this is the first part.
The taxonomic section includes original keys and county distribution maps based on the 80,000 herbarium specimens examined by the author (20,000 in Carex!) and short texts accompanying each species giving habitat, range and comparisons with similar taxa. Descriptive in-formation is largely confined to the keys and species descriptions are eliminated in the text. At least one species in each genus is illustrated by a line drawing. Colored illustrations include the frontispiece and 8 plates, the latter with illustrations of one or more members of each family included in the volume. Glossary and index complete this volume which is appropriately dedicated to the late Dale J. Hagenah, long a student of the Michigan flora and an individual who enthusiastically shared his knowledge of the flora with others. A handsome dust jacket and modest price in no way detract from the book. Two additional volumes treating the dicotyledons are planned to follow this auspicious beginning.
Warren Stoutamire University of Akron
1'REECE, T. F. and C. H. DICKINSON (eds.). Ecology of Leaf Surface Micro-organisms, 640 pp., Academic Press, 1971, $26.00.
As one might suspect by the origin of the volume, it suffers, as do many published symposia, from a certain lack of unity and direction. A more appropriate title might have been "A Collection of Papers on the Ecology of Leaf Surface Micro-organisms."
This volume represents a collection of 47 papers presented in a symposium convened to examine in the broadest sense the "Phylloplane microflora". The symposium, held at the University of Newcastle at Tyne, was attended by 64 scientists representing 12 countries.
The papers are organized into 5 sections each dealing, more or less, with a single aspect of microbe-leaf interaction. The topics and number of papers per section are as follows: Section I, Characteristics of Leaf Surfaces, 6 papers; Section II, Saprophytes on the Leaf Surface, 9 papers; Section III, Pathogens on Leaf Surfaces, 16 papers; Section IV, Microbiology of Senescing Leaves, 6 papers; and Section V, Literactions on the Leaf Surface, 10 papers.
Lt addition, there is variation in the manner in which the information is presented in that some papers are far more theorical than others, and some sections tend to be more unified. For example, I felt Section I presented a
relatively thorough view of Che physical and chemical nature of the leaf surface, methodology in working with it,
and some excellent electron micrographs of it.
The topics covered in sections II through V were con-
siderably less complete, but then were considerably more
All aspects considered, the book is of tremendous
value in bringing together information on leaf micro-organism and their environment. Also, by the nature of the papers the reader is provided with indepth knowledge and an appreciation of the present state of affairs of the
ecology of leaf surface micro-organisms.
Frederick I. Eilers
University of South Florida
Whether one reviews hooks to get free copies, to add
to a bibliography or out of a sense of noblesse oblige, there is considerable reluctance to report on symposium volumes. In the limited book-review space, one can either catalogue the papers, noting those that are of interest to the reviewer, or attempt the impossible by evaluating the thrust of the symposium and the relevance of the papers to that thrust.
The volume under consideration is neither better or worse than the run of symposia. The contributions vary from those that are strictly biochemical and virtually in-dependent of the starting organism to those that are primarily or exclusively plant related, i.e., gibberellin biosynthesis, synthesis of chloroplast enzymes, carbohydrate metabolism in germinating grains. Not unexpectedly, the Holy Trinity of DNA-RNA-Protein come in for a fair share of attention.
With the scorn that the biochemist has been heaping on the morphologist and taxonomist during the past ten years for being little more than a "stamp collector," it is interesting to note that only three papers in this book at-tempt to go beyond descriptive biochemistry into the more difficult and exciting realm of control of biosynthesis. One gets the impression that the biochemical knight on the white molecular charger has blunted his lance on the same obscure foe that the more classical botanist has been struggling with for these many years.
This volume will, like others, be useful for about a year or two.
Richard M. Klein
ROBERTS, DANIEL A., and CARL W. BOOTHROYD. Fundamentals of Plant Pathology. W. H. Freeman Co., San Francisco; 402 pp, 1972. $15.00.
According to the authors, this book has been written primarily for use by those undergraduate students who are taking their first course in plant pathology. In order to use this book successfully, no prior knowledge of the field is necessary except for a very general understanding of botany. The book is divided into two almost equal sections — the first covering the basic principles of plant pathology, and the second covering examples of those principles in the form of descriptions of specific diseases. The two sections are intended to be used simultaneously with cycles and descriptions of diseases in the second section used to illustrate the principles outlined in the first section. Two short chapters at the end of the book deal with the techniques for diagnosis of plant diseases and the use of the literature of plant pathology. The text is followed by an excellent glossary so necessary to a good introductory text and so often missing.
The first section of the book is divided into nine chapters which cover topics such as Morphological Symptoms of Diseased Plants, Production and Dispersal of Inocula, and The Prevention of Disease in Plants. These nine chapters provide a well-organized introduction of plant pathology to the beginning student, and the use in the text of boldfaced type for new or difficult words which appear in the glossary is a great aid to the development of vocabulary.
The second section, consisting of 14 chapters, is organized more or less according to the type of impaired physiology involved in diseases rather than according to the more commonly used organization according to causal agent. Typical chapter headings are: Diseases Affecting Breakdown and Utilization of Stored Food Materials, Diseases Affecting Water Conduction, Diseases Affecting Photosynthesis, and so on. Each chapter contains in-formation concerning the etiology, epidemiology, and prevention of a few specific diseases chosen to illustrate the particular type of impaired physiology covered in that chapter. Because the diseases included in this book have been chosen as specific examples, certain classic diseases commonly found in general plant pathology texts are missing. For that reason, one should not rely heavily on the text as a reference book. The diseases that are included, however, are well covered and the disease cycle diagrams that accompany some of the disease descriptions are among the best available.
In general, this book is professionally written and seems to have very few technical errors for a first edition. There are, however, three major factors which considerably detract from the value of the book — these are listed in increasing order of importance.
Some of the photographs, especially in the first section, are amazingly bad. One has to look closely at a picture of southern leaf blight of corn to determine that the plant is corn. This problem should be easily remedied in future editions by replacing some of the photographs with better ones which should be readily available.
The second problem concerns the organization of Section II according to the type of impaired physiology rather than according to causal agents. The authors state in their preface that they have organized this part of the book ac-cording to, "... the physiological activities of the plant that are adversely affected by the disease in question." This approach to plant pathology is unquestionably superior to the causal agent approach, provided that the student has enough background in physiology to appreciate abnormal physiological activities in the diseased plant,. Advanced texts have used this approach very effectively. In fact, however, the beginning student can appreciate little of the physiology of disease and is much bet-ter prepared to begin learning about plant diseases by classifying them according to morphological symptoms which can be easily seen, and by causal agents which have probably been learned in a previous course in general botany. The authors wisely perceive this problem and although they arrange the diseases according to impairment of physiology, there is very little actual discussion of physiology in the text. In fact much of the description of each disease concerns the causal agent.
The most serious flaw in this book, however, is the fact that it is hopelessly outdated. The average date of the literature cited in Section I is 1937, and in Section II, it is 1944. Although it may be argued that a general text should contain an historical account of the science in or-der to orient the beginning student to the present situation, the student is more likely to erroneously con-
elude that little progress has been made during the past 30 years. More importantly, however, many of the statements made in the book are no longer true. The classification of fungi, for example, includes the class, "Phycomycetes", even though this class has not been generally recognized by mycologists for several years. The presentation of circumstantial climatic data from the 1930's to suggest that rust uredospores are blown from Mexico to the North American wheat belt seems archaic in view of the fact that high flying plants regularly demonstrate the presence of these spores in the upper atmosphere, and that the paths of these spores across the country have been mapped. Perhaps the best example of this book's being outdated is contained in the short paragraph covering protoplasmic resistance. One of the most rapidly growing and most exciting areas in plant pathology is summed up by the statement, "The biochemical nature of protoplasmic resistance is not understood." The authors allow one exception to this statement; the demonstration by link et al. around 1930 that protocatechnic acid and catechol cause disease resistance in onions.
W. L. Klarman
MILLER, LAWRENCE P. (editor). Phytochemistry Volume I. The Process and Products of Photosynthesis. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company. 1972. $22.50.
The first few chapters deal with the structure of chloroplasts and the carbon reduction cycle of photosynthesis. However, the main thrust of the book is with what the editor considers to be the products of photosynthesis. Other aspects of photosynthetic products are covered in remaining volumes of this series. The book is multiauthored and as a result suffers from some of the traits of this kind of work. Little correlation is made from one chapter to another and as a result the book has minimal integration among the various topics. The book is without doubt authoritative and quite technical in many respects. The first few chapters are of a more general nature that would be suitable for undergraduate text material, but the remiander of the book is obviously prepared for the investigator who is intimate with the subject matter. It is for this reason that the book, as a whole, probably would not be suitable for undergraduate courses and would be viewed as most appropriate for specialized graduate courses or for the researcher. Also, the price of the book would probably limit the extent of its market. The chapters are smoothly written, but the description of one compound after another in several of the chapters made these somewhat less interesting than those which deal also with the metabolism and physiology of the compounds in question. There seemed to be more printing errors than one generally finds in a book of this nature.
The introductory chapter (L. P. Miller) is of a general nature and deals with such subjects as the problems of chemical taxonomy, pollution by plants, plants as food and toxin-producing agents, oils and odoriferous compounds, compounds which cause psychic effects, the origin of photosynthesis, and photosynthesis in relation to man. Chapter 2 (J. J. Wolken) concentrates on the chemistry and structure of the chloroplast in Euglena. Less attention is paid to the higher-plant chloroplast and to the more modern models of chloroplast structure. The book is weak in terms of a discussion concerning the physical phenomena of photosynthesis. The chapter also reflects the author's interest in chloroplastin. Chapter 3 (J. A. Bassham) emphasizes the fact that photosynthesis is erroneously described as a process which produces only simple carbohydrates. Rather, in the light, the photosynthetic products may be used directly to synthesize many compounds without having to be stored first as simple carbohydrates. The carbon reduction cycle as well as some aspects of the regulation of photosynthesis are considered. Chapter 4 (0. T. G. Jones) treats in some detail the biosynthesis of chlorophylls as well as the spectroscopy of the chlorophylls. This chapter begins the portion of the book that is written at a higher level. Chapter 5 (T. W. Goodwin) deals with the carotenoids and the develop-mental changes of carotenoids in plant organs. The biosynthesis and functions of the carotenoids are also briefly discussed. Chapter 6 (L. P. Miller) is primarily a catalog of the plant mono- and oligosaccharides - their structures and where they are found. The lack of linkage numbers in the chemical names is a bit disconcerting and, in general, the metabolic aspects are largely ignored. Chapter 7 (D. J. Manners) is complete in that it covers many aspects of starch and inulin. The structures of starch, especially, and inulin as well as the metabolism, enzymology, and physiology of these compounds are discussed. The section on inulin is very limited as compared to that on starch. Chapter 8 (G. A. Towle and R. L. Whistler) describes the structure and biological localization of the hemicelluloses as well as the composition and economic utilization of gums. Chapter 9 (J. Teng and R. L. Whistler) concentrates, especially, on the structures and physical and optical properties of cellulose. The properties of chitin are only briefly treated. Chapter 10 (J. J. Doesburg) considers the nature of pectic compounds and especially considers the jelling properties of these substances. Some aspects of enzymology and biosynthesis in reference to these compounds are discussed. Chapter 11 (L. P. Miller) is a little more comprehensive than some of the others and is mainly a discussion of the structure and location of glycosides. Some metabolic aspects of these compounds are briefly considered.
In general the book should be of use to the investigator who does not have on hand a general review of these compounds which are discussed. Some sections may serve as text material.
David W. Newman
DOBZHANSKY, TH., M. K. HECHT, and W. C. STEERE (eds.). Evolutionary Biology, Vol. 6, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York. 1973.
This volume of Evolutionary Biology is dedicated to George Gaylord Simpson on the occasion of his 70th birth-day. Appropriately, most of the 16 papers included in this collection focus on problems associated with vertebrates. Among these are five papers dealing with human evolution contributed by Washburn, Neel and Schull, Lewontin, Lerner, and Dobzhansky.
Although none of the included papers focuses on plants per, se, .the systematist will find the paper by Schaeffer, Hecht, and Eldredge to be of interest. These authors, analyzing the relevance of paleontological data to the construction of phylogenies, conclude that the temporal sequence of fossils should have little, if any, input to the initial determination of a set of relationships among taxa. In their view, biostratigraphic data properly enter only after the selection of one of the several possible phylogenetic trees to serve as a "best fit" estimate of relationships. Thus temporal data are relegated to the analysis of evolutionary patterns and rates.
Another paper of particularly broad interest is that by E. E. Williams, who attempts to reconstruct ecological
processes by which anoline lizards have become fitted together in coadapted species complexes in Puerto Rico. Using "ecological rules" derived from studies of con-temporary assemblages, Williams shows how it is possible to rationally speculate on the origin of ecologically complex interrelationships of the mature fauna.
Although the orientation of this volume is not botanical, many botanists will undoubtedly find several of the papers to be both stimulating and relevant to their research interests.
Charles E. King
GOODWIN, T. W. and E. I. MERCER. Introduction to Plant Biochemistry. Pergamon Press, New York. 1972. VII + 359 pp.
This volume deals with fundamental biochemical processes which are characteristic of many organisms but strongly emphasizes information obtained from plant systems. Thus more than one-third of the text is devoted to bio-energetics, enzyme kinetics, respiration and basic metabolism. Additional chapters provide excellent introductions to the biochemistry of the plant cell wall and photosynthesis. The chapter on photosynthesis contains such useful material as a discussion of various reagents which are frequently used in experimental studies and a consideration of primary photochemistry. Related topics including a good discussion of redox potentials and a summary of porphyrin biosynthesis are covered in other chapters. In keeping with the primary orientation towards more general topics, terpenes and terpenoids, alkaloids, and flavonoids and related compounds are briefly surveyed. These chapters do, however, contain numerous structural formulae illustrating the diversity of compounds which can be synthesized by plants.
Unique features of the format adopted for this text are the inclusion of systematic nomenclature for specific enzymes at the end of each chapter and the use of a number of fold-out pages which provide clear illustrations of chemical structures and metabolic pathways. Each of 15 chapters is outlined and appropriately subdivided into specific topics.
The author's attempts to maintain a moderate size volume have resulted in several less desirable features. Only limited material on proteins and protein synthesis is included and from a personal point of view, metabolic regulation is insufficiently covered. Most of the text material is presented at a level which assumes that the reader has completed a comprehensive course in biochemisty. In the section on enzyme kinetics, for example, the listed uses of Km could be misleading in absence of knowledge gained elsewhere. Similarly, the reader is alerted to the potential lack of accuracy of Lineweaver-Burk plots but alternative transformations are not mentioned. In contrast, a somewhat elementary consideration of plant cell structure and function is provided in Chapter :3 to aid biochemists less familiar with plants. Nevertheless, the occasional use of terms such as "Photosynthetic unit" without definition could be confusing and reference to the cell wall as a "tough membrane" is inappropriate.
Given that this volume is not intended as an introductory biochemistry text, its most severe limitation is the complete omission of original literature citations. Although a few specialized texts and general review articles are cited at the end of each chapter, readers should anticipate some minor frustration engendered by being unable to easily clarify such apparently conflicting statements as: "In plant mitochondria ... little or no cytochrome c1 is present ..." (p. 119) and ". . . a cytochrome of the c, type has recently been demonstrated ... in the mitochondria of higher plants ..." (p. 125). Furthermore, experimental results which tend to support specific concepts are mentioned with reasonable frequency. This is highly desirable but such results should be accessible to the reader for critical examination. Apparent references such as "Lucy (1964) proposed ... "are sometimes included in the text but not cited in the bibliography.
On balance, the authors have made a useful contribution to the source material for teachers and students of biochemistry and plant physiology. With supplemental reading, less chemically oriented students should be able to obtain a valuable overview of many aspects of plant biochemistry from this volume. Although the lack of reference material is clearly detrimental, this limitation is partially compensated by the readability of the text and the orientation towards both the unity and diversity of biochemical processes which are manifested by plants.
J. K. Bryan
PLANT SCIENCE BULLETIN LIFE SCIENCE BUILDING UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA TAMPA, FLORIDA 33620